Inside Line tests hundreds of vehicles a year, but not every vehicle gets a full write-up. The numbers still tell a story, though, so we present "IL Track Tested." It's a quick rundown of all the data we collected at the track, along with comments direct from the test drivers. Enjoy.
Mitsubishi's i car is part of the kei car class in Japan. Basically, this is the smallest type of car you can buy there, and the Japanese government subsidizes them (in the form of tax breaks and insurance savings) to encourage people to buy them. The dimensions of the cars are limited to 3.3 meters long by 1.4 meters wide; there's no height limit. The maximum engine displacement is 660cc.
The Mitsubishi i car was somewhat revolutionary when it entered this segment because of its rear-midship engine layout and rear-drive architecture. By locating the engine in the back, Mitsubishi opened up more space in the cabin and improved ride and handling dynamics (generally not a strong point of these ungainly little cars).
So there's the Mitsubishi i, which has a 660cc three-cylinder gasoline engine. There's also the i MiEV, which is an i car that swaps out that gas engine for a rear-drive electric motor and a lithium-ion battery pack. The i MiEV is Mitsubishi's first electric car. It's already being sold to commercial fleets in Japan, and Mitsu has said it will start selling it to Japanese consumers in April. Eventually, the plan is to bring the i MiEV to North America.
We tested the i and the i MiEV on the same day. The numbers are definitely not the stuff of champions, but this is the first time we've ever had an electric car outperform its gasoline counterpart -- and with a 300-pound weight disadvantage to boot.
i MiEV i
0-30 (sec): 4.5 4.3
0-45 (sec): 7.9 8.4
0-60 (sec): 13.5 14.9
0-75 (sec): ----- -----
1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 19.3 @ 70.3 19.7 @ 68.0
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 13.1 14.6
30-0 (ft): 32 29
60-0 (ft): 132 120
Skid pad lateral acceleration (g): 0.73 0.74
Slalom 61.9 60.2
Vehicle: 2010 Mitsubishi i MiEV
Odometer: 6,136 (km)
Date: 12/22/09
Driver: Josh Jacquot
Price: N/A
Specifications:
Drive Type: Rear-wheel drive
Transmission Type: Single-stage helical
Engine Type: Permanent-magnet synchronous electric motor (with 330-volt lithium-ion battery pack)
Redline (rpm): N/A
Horsepower (hp @ rpm): 63
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm): 133
Brake Type (front): Ventilated disc with single-piston sliding caliper
Brake Type (rear): Drum
Steering System: Electrically-assisted power rack-and-pinion
Steering Ratio: Variable, 16.5:1 to 17.0:1
Suspension Type (front) Independent, MacPherson strut, coil springs, stabilizer bar
Suspension Type (rear): Three-link De Dion axle, coil springs
Tire Size (front): 145/65R15 72S
Tire Size (rear): 145/65R15 72S
Tire Brand: Dunlop
Tire Model: Enasave ES801
Tire Type: Low rolling resistance all-season
Curb Weight As Tested (lb): 2,450
Test Results:
0 - 30 (sec): 4.5
0 - 45 (sec): 7.9
0 - 60 (sec): 13.5
0 - 75 (sec): -----
1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 19.3 @ 70.9
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 13.1
30 - 0 (ft): 32
60 - 0 (ft): 132
Braking Rating: Average
Slalom (mph): 61.9
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.73
Handling Rating: Average
Db @ Idle: N/A
Db @ Full Throttle: 63.2
Db @ 70 mph Cruise: 63.2
Acceleration Comments: Acceleration is as uneventful and seamless as using a kitchen mixer and is accompanied by very similar sounds. Just put your foot down and speed builds slowly with little drama. No shifting. No thinking. No caring -- just like people will want with this kind of car.
Braking Comments: Wow! This is the softest brake pedal I've ever experienced. Not as unnatural as many cars with regenerative systems. Though the feel isn't good and the pedal travel is long, we were able to acclimate to this setup.
Handling Comments: The Mitsubishi i wasn't designed to engage its driver in handling tests, especially this EV model, which has 45-series tires. It feels tall and narrow, just like it looks, and this does little for making it graceful through the slalom. It never feels unstable, just uncomfortable at the limit. Still, the electric version, thanks to immediate throttle response, is quicker through the slalom than the gas-powered i car.
Vehicle: 2010 Mitsubishi i
Odometer: 3,999 (km)
Date: 12/22/09
Driver: Josh Jacquot
Price: $16,000 (estimated)
Specifications:
Drive Type: All-wheel drive
Transmission Type: 4-speed automatic
Engine Type: Inline 3 cylinder, turbocharged and intercooled
Displacement (cc/cu-in): 659/40
Valvetrain: DOHC, 4 valves per cylinder
Redline (rpm): N/A
Horsepower (hp @ rpm): 63 @ 6,000
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm): 69 @ 3,000
Brake Type (front): Ventilated disc with single-piston sliding caliper
Brake Type (rear): Drum
Steering System: Electrically-assisted power rack-and-pinion
Steering Ratio: Variable, 16.5:1 to 17.0:1
Suspension Type (front) Independent, MacPherson strut, coil springs, stabilizer bar
Suspension Type (rear): Three-link De Dion axle, coil springs
Tire size, front: 145/65R15 72S
Tire size, rear: 175/55R15 77V
Tire brand: Dunlop
Tire model: SP Sport 2030
Tire type: Summer performance
Curb weight, as-tested (lb): 2,147
Test Results:
0 - 30 (sec): 4.3
0 - 45 (sec): 8.4
0 - 60 (sec): 14.9
0 - 75 (sec): -----
1/4 mile (sec. @ mph): 19.7 @ 68.0
0-60 with 1-ft rollout (sec.): 14.6
30 - 0 (ft): 29
60 - 0 (ft): 120
Braking rating: Good
Slalom (mph): 60.2
Skid pad lateral acceleration (g): 0.74
Handling rating: Average
Acceleration Comments: Brake torque seems to do little to help motivate the i off the line. Shifts are slow and gear spacing is wide. Third gear is especially tall. Not powerful enough for busy American freeways.
Braking Comments: Consistent stops without drama. Tracking is straight and we experienced no significant fade.
Handling Comments: The Mitsubishi i wasn't designed to engage its driver in handling tests. It likes to heel over and get into a hop-hop-hop cycle around the skidpad which doesn't stop until the driver lifts. Silly and pointless. Feels very out of place in handling tests. Slow steering, low roll stiffness and very little grip assign this machine to its target -- city car drivers only.
firstclass says:
07:21 PM, 01/12/10
Zero to sixty in 13.5 seconds…watch out Geo Metro owners. Now compare it to the top selling Sears go cart?
firstwagon says:
10:14 PM, 01/12/10
They are designed to be city cars, not sports cars.
It's for people who spend all their time going light to light, bumper to bumper in the never ending drearyness that is living in a big city. 0 to 60 doesn't matter as you will never go that fast. Even 0 to 30 doesn't matter as you will just rear end the taxi in front of you if you floor it.
It outsmarts the Smart as the perfect city car.
jackson611 says:
11:09 PM, 01/12/10
@firstwagon:
having lived in both a big city, a small city, and a small town, the traffic of a big city and the driving distances are well worth it. no matter what you want to do in a big city, chances are you will find it, and there is always the chance for newness (don't know if that is a word) and adventure.
don't dog on the big cities as "dreary."living in a farming town where all activities close around 5 except for the restaurants, which stay open until 8. i spent a fortune on fireworks and other non-sense during that summer just to stay occupied.
throwback says:
05:17 AM, 01/13/10
I grew up in a big city (NYC) and I would never own an EV if I still lived there. Mass transit is great, which I used daily to go to work and school. I owned a series of sporty cars (Rx-7, 911, Mustang GT, Porsche 968) specifically because when I wanted to drive, I wanted to have fun. I would head up state and enjoy the driving. I rarely drove in Manhattan and kept my car in a my folks garage in Queens.
zoomzoomn says:
07:18 AM, 01/13/10
"In fact, the gas car is quicker to 60 than the electric version..."
Huh? Not according to your data. Anyway, at this rate who cares?
firstwagon says:
09:16 AM, 01/13/10
jackson611
Sorry if I was in a bummer of a mood yesterday.
I too have lived in small towns, large towns small cities and giant ones as well as in the country over the last 40+ years. I currently lve in a small city which is really just part of a giant city.
While I wouldn't go back to a small town in the middle of nowhere again, I really find big cities depressing and dreary. Sure everything is here but it's always somewhere that's a pain to get to, the cost of everything is a killer and after a while you just don't do much here either. Everywhere I want to go takes like an hour driving time and you are always stuck in traffic.
We don't have a public transit system that is anywhere close to the incredible system in NYC so if I went back to living in the downtown core again I think a car like the little Mitsubishi i MiEV would be fine.
toxic_science says:
09:26 AM, 01/13/10
zoomzoomn says:
07:18 AM, 01/13/10
"In fact, the gas car is quicker to 60 than the electric version..."
Huh? Not according to your data. Anyway, at this rate who cares?
Maybe he meant 30!?? :) I agree though...doesn't matter when your accelerating like a lawn mower...
actualsize says:
09:26 AM, 01/13/10
I'm sure the electric version's low center of gravity helped it in the slalom, too. All of that extra weight is super-low in the chassis.
And even though no one is pretending these conveyances are sports cars, handling still matters a lot. Limit maneuver testing isn't solely about fun and games. The results can also be viewed as a measure of accident avoidance potential.
stewy3572 says:
09:33 PM, 01/13/10
I just don't think battery power is the future for cars. The range is limited and there are too many concessions for the driver to make - handling, comfort, practicality. All for being 'green', which is suspect since the electricity used for these pointless cars is still most likely made by pulling something out of the ground and burning it.
To date, i've not seen one solely electric car do the same work as a regular petrol or diesel engine powered car. And I include the Tesla in that. What I do hold out hope for is to see more hydrogen cars become available. Find a cheap way to use solar or wind power to generate the hydrogen from water, build the infrastructure along side existing petrol stations and start introducing proper cars with comparable range, function and dynamics to what we're driving today.
All these silly looking 'electric' cars are just a waste of time, money and erm.. energy.. to me. There are better, cleaner solutions.
nwng says:
02:41 PM, 01/14/10
I like the regular i, 2100 lbs with 63 hp. hp/weight ratio about the same as a 86 civic. Thousands commute in cities and suburbs in those without major problems, right?
melohor says:
09:31 PM, 01/17/10
I agree with stewy3572. I believe hydrogen car is the future, because we don't have to wait to charge up the battery. Who wants to go to a gas station and wait 30 min to charge up the car, right?